“There was never a plan to leave Iraq because there is no intention to leave Iraq. We (the Americans) are currently building 14 bases there. Dick Cheney can’t imagine giving up that oil. The military can’t imagine giving up those bases. That’s why they can’t come up with a plan to leave.” - Chalmers Johnson, author of Sorrows of Empire, in LA Weekly, July 6 2004
Re: What Is The Solution Brothers
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by liveshoaib: *
"There was never a plan to leave Iraq because there is no intention to leave Iraq. We (the Americans) are currently building 14 bases there. Dick Cheney can't imagine giving up that oil. The military can't imagine giving up those bases. That's why they can't come up with a plan to leave." - Chalmers Johnson, author of Sorrows of Empire, in LA Weekly, July 6 2004
[/QUOTE]
So long freedom fighters keep the heat on by killing terrorist and blowing up oil supplies... the moment the terrorist find a face saver they are gone.... Hey they ran from several conflicts before and they will run from here.... wana bet..... Its when not if...
WELL THE SOLUTION IS TIME
this is nothing but another crusade and history repeats itself
just as the in the first crusade the crusaders had an upper hand in early part of crusade until saladin and beybers came on the scene
similarly technological edge is giving an upper hand for the bush regime at the moment the time passes a new saladin and beybers will emerge among the muslims and the crusaders will have to retreat in humilation
Re: What Is The Solution Brothers
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by liveshoaib: *
"There was never a plan to leave Iraq because there is no intention to leave Iraq. We (the Americans) are currently building 14 bases there. Dick Cheney can't imagine giving up that oil. The military can't imagine giving up those bases. That's why they can't come up with a plan to leave." - Chalmers Johnson, author of Sorrows of Empire, in LA Weekly, July 6 2004
[/QUOTE]
please add your own comments also or i will be forced to delete the thread. thanks
ISLAMIC STATE
ISLAMIC STATE IS THE ONLY SOLUTION
Islam makes it a duty upon all Muslims to work to change their countries from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam, and this can be achieved by establishing the Islamic State i.e. the Khilafah, and by electing a Khaleefah and taking a bay’ah on him that he will rule by the Word of Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) i.e. he will implement Islamic laws in the country where the Khilafah has been established. Then the Muslims should work with the Khilafah to combine the rest of the Islamic countries with it, hence the countries will become Dar al-Islam and they will then carry Islam to the world through invitation and jihad.
Is the Monarchical system an Islamic System?
The Monarchical system is not an Islamic system and Islam does not approve of it whether the king is a figurehead who does not rule, as is the case in Britain and Spain, because the Khaleefah is not a figurehead, rather he is the ruler and an executor of the laws of Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) on behalf of the Ummah, or if the king is the head and the actual ruler, as is the case in Saudi Arabia and Jordan. This is because the Khaleefah does not acquire his position like the kings do; rather, Muslims select him and give him the bay’ah. The hereditary system is not allowed in Islam; the Khaleefah does not have more privileges than any other Muslim citizen and he is not above the Law like the kings who cannot be tried, rather he is subservient to the laws of Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) and is liable to be accounted on every act he commits.
*Is the Republican system an Islamic System? *
The Republican system is not an Islamic system and Islam does not approve of it whether it is Presidential in nature as in the US or it is Parliamentary, as found in Germany, because the Republican system in both these forms is based on the democratic system which gives the sovereignty to the people, whilst the system of Khilafah is based on the system of Islam that gives sovereignty to the Shara’. Accordingly the Ummah does not have the right to remove the Khaleefah, though she has the right to choose him and to account him, and only the Islamic rule can remove the Khaleefah i.e. in case he works against the Shara’ in such a way that it becomes necessary to remove him. The power to decide whether the Khaleefah has worked against the Law such that he must be removed rests with the Mahkamat ul-Mudhalim (Court of the Unjust Acts) which has the authority to remove him from the seat of Khaleefah, due to Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) ruling,
“O you who believe! Obey Allah, obey the Messenger and the rulers from amongst you, and if you disagree on a matter then return it (for judgement) to Allah and the Messenger if you truly believe in Allah and the Last Day.” [TMQ 4:59]
This means that they must turn over the matter to the Law of Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) and His Messenger (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam), and the Court of the Unjust Acts represents the Law of Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) and His Messenger (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam), whilst in the case of the President of the Republican system the people have the right to remove him, because the people have the sovereignty and the authority. The Khaleefah is not elected for a limited term; the only limitation to his rule is the implementation of Islam. If he does not implement Islam, he will be removed even if it is after only one month of his appointment. In contrast the President of the Republic is elected for a limited term. Moreover, in the Parliamentary system there is the Prime Minister beside the President, and the President is only a figurehead without power, the real power rests with the Prime Minister. The Khaleefah is the real ruler and he rules and implements his orders and he has no ministers who rule independent of him.
*Is the Presidential system an Islamic System *
Although the President in the Presidential system is himself the actual ruler, he does have with him ministers who have authority of ruling and he is their head and his rank is that of the President of the government. This is in contradiction to the system of Khilafah where the Khaleefah rules directly, and he has with him assistants. These assistants do not have the powers of ministers as in the democratic Republican system. When the Khaleefah becomes the ruler he is the ruler in the capacity of the head of the State and not the head of an executive committee. Therefore there exists a great difference between the Republican and the Khilafah systems, and therefore it is not allowed to name the Islamic State an Islamic Republic, nor is it allowed to say that the system of government in Islam is Republican nor that Islam is a Republican system because of the complete contradiction between the two.
Is the Islamic System an Imperial System?
The regions ruled by Islam - though they are of various races and linked to one central place - are not ruled by an imperial system but by a system contradictory to the imperial system. The Imperial system does not treat races equally in the various regions of the empire; rather it gives privileges in the ruling, finance and economy to the centre of the empire.
The Islamic way of ruling is to equate between the subjects in all the regions of the state. Islam grants non-Muslims who hold citizenship, the full rights and duties that Muslims have. They enjoy the same fairness as Muslims and are subject to the same accountability like them. Furthermore, every single citizen, regardless of his or her creed, enjoys rights that even a Muslim living abroad who holds no citizenship does not enjoy. With this equality, the Islamic system differs completely from the Imperial one. It does not make the regions under its ruling into colonies, areas of exploitation, nor a source of wealth funneled back into the central region for its own benefit, no matter how far apart they were, and no matter how different their races were. It considers every single region as a part of the state and its citizens enjoying the same rights as those in the central region. It also makes the ruling authority, its system and its legislation the same in all the regions.
*Is the Federal System an Islamic System? *
The ruling system in Islam is not federal, where its regions separate by autonomy, but unite in the general ruling. It is rather a system of unity, where Marrakesh in the West is considered to be the same as Khurasan in the East; and the province of Al-Fayoom would be the same as Cairo if it were the Islamic capital. The finance of all the regions will be the same, as will their budget. Funds are spent equally on the affairs of the subjects, regardless of their Wilayah. If for instance, the taxes collected in one Wilayah were double its expenditure, the funds spent will be to cover the Wilayah’s needs but not according to how much tax raised. If another Wilayah’s taxes fell short of its expenditure, this would not be taken into consideration, and funds will be spent to satisfy the Wilayah’s needs from the general budget whether it raised enough taxes or not.
Therefore the ruling system is one unit not a federation. That is why the Islamic ruling system is distinguished from other known systems, in its origin and basis, even if some of its aspects were similar to some of their aspects. Furthermore, the Islamic system is central in its ruling, where the high authority is at head office, and where the authority and power engulfs every single part of the state, no matter how small or large it is; independence of any part of it is not allowed thus preventing disintegration. The high authority is the body which appoints the army commanders, the Walis, rulers and finance and economy officials. He appoints judges in all the regions and everyone whose duties is to rule. He is the one who deals with ruling all over the land.
Live, he asked you to add a line or two, and not write a novel.
Abdali is right on the Riyal; because some Matoos are deadest on making Iraq into another Palestine which is not a distant possibility.
why are they there
the question is why are americans there, everybody knows why and no muslim leader is tryin to help them except some fighters coz they know what islam is about, if we muslims got armies why dont the leaders allow them to go and fight. if the rulers dont want them to fight then they should do somethin different like cooking, farming etc. what is the fun our brothers and sisters are dying and muslim armiers are watchin them bleed.....and so our rulers who are american and british agents.
The solution lies in getting even, not mad. Use the 200 Billion and possibly more the US is investing in Iraq to make a model out of the country, and make Iraqis live a good life by selling costly oil to the world using the pipelines the US shall fix. Making a point to the world by killing more Americans shall only be a pyrrhic victory not a real one.
i dont know
[QUOTE]
The solution lies in getting even, not mad. Use the 200 Billion and possibly more the US is investing in Iraq to make a model out of the country, and make Iraqis live a good life by selling costly oil to the world using the pipelines the US shall fix. Making a point to the world by killing more Americans shall only be a pyrrhic victory not a real one.
[/QUOTE]
surya i think u need a lot of knowledge about american policies........
Hey now that Ramadan is over can I smoke what you are smoking 
Once upon a time there used to be a big bad guy called OBL who used to live not far away in a cave close to the land of pure (Pakistan). Now OBL always looked for mischief and when he saw that his posse (Taliban) was winning and soon there will no more places to fire weapons, kill people in the name of Allah Mian. He decided to show the birdie to the great white Satan (U.S), by flying a few perfectly flying aircrafts into perfectly erect buildings 
. Now the great satan got mad ooooh 
and decided to drop a few oblong shaped (eggplant) devices that explode on contact (made by Agent Smith, manufactured by Lockheed Martin). Wait… that was not enough and the people on the island of U.S wanted more. want more dada want more dada… So Uncle Clint Eastwood (Bush Jr) in his blind hubris decided to settle some differences with another bad a$$ called Shaykh Saddam Hussein. Now Chacha OBL hears this and says a few Nafls (prayers for extra credit), picks up his cell phone and calls his buddies “CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW!!!; Chota Bush is coming to town, our prayers have been fulfilled, get them Ak-47s and IEDs ready, boys we are gonna have some fun once again, FINALLY”. Now Clint thought that he would go in, kick him out and people of Babylon will start bowing to him instead of Mecca, but poor clint made a judgemental (may be a bit too strong of a word in his case) error and now he is stuck with a war with no end in sight, 200 billion dollars being sapped and innocent lives (on both ends ) being lost due to his hubris.
So Moral of the story no body wants peace, peace is a cliche.
Oh and if you guys want peace come to my house we will all sit like Crazy Horse and smoke the peace pipe with some fine and dandy herbs.
After viewing the killing of wounded Iraqi by an American scum sucking pig of a marine. Here is the solution.
I guess killing is justified in the name of freedom so it is OK to kill, rape, pillage and plunder in the name of DEMOCRACY and FREEDOM.
Remember the rules:
You MAY kill the wounded but MAYNOT behead the hotages (that have been told on number of occasions to leave Iraq). Big difference.
Re: What Is The Solution Brothers
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by liveshoaib: *
"There was never a plan to leave Iraq because there is no intention to leave Iraq. We (the Americans) are currently building 14 bases there. Dick Cheney can't imagine giving up that oil. The military can't imagine giving up those bases. That's why they can't come up with a plan to leave." - Chalmers Johnson, author of Sorrows of Empire, in LA Weekly, July 6 2004
[/QUOTE]
Brother the harsh reality is that there IS NO SOLUTION.
Americans are gradually pushing back the fighters and there does not seem to be any change in Iraqi fortune even in distant future or any likely success of jihadis.
As a child i was led to beleif that the sole reason for Muslim plight was lack of Iman, and disunity,i still agree to a great extent but there IS LOT MORE THAN THIS.
It is apparent that ALL MUSLIM COUNTRIES UNITED cannot take on US.Remember just over 50 years ago britain and France was occupying most of Ismlamic countries.Today US is much stronger than that.
The ONLY SOLUTION is to work to get strong AND to establish societies in which people can make use of there abilities.
I also feel so sad for the Iraqis but i think its time for us to focus how can we PREVENT PAKISTAN BECOMING ANOTHER IRAQ.We must focus to establish a just and productive Islamic society in Pakistan to have any hope of changing the direction things have taken.OTHERWISE......
that is not right
As for the Sunnah, Nafi‘a reported saying: “‘Umar said to me that he heard the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) saying: Whoso takes off his hand from allegiance to Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) will meet Him (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) on the Day of Resurrection without having any proof for him, and whoso dies whilst there was no bay‘ah (allegiance or a pledge) on his neck (to a Khaleefah), he dies a death of jahilliyah.” So the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) made it compulsory upon every Muslim to have a bay‘ah on his neck, and described whoever dies without a bay‘ah on his neck that he dies a death of jahilliyah. The bay‘ah cannot be for anyone except the Khaleefah, and the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) made it obligatory upon every Muslim to have on his neck a bay‘ah to a Khaleefah. Yet he did not make it an obligation upon every Muslim to give bay‘ah to a Khaleefah. The duty is the existence of a bay‘ah on the neck of every eligible Muslim, i.e. the existence of a Khaleefah who accordingly deserves a bay‘ah upon the neck of every Muslim. So it is the presence of the Khaleefah which places a bay‘ah on the neck of every Muslim, whether the Muslim gave a bay‘ah to him in person or not.
Therefore, this hadith of the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) is an evidence that the appointment of the Khaleefah is an obligation and not a proof that giving the bay‘ah is obligatory. This is so because the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) rebuked the Muslim who has not a bay‘ah on his neck until he dies, not the one who did not give bay‘ah. Hisham ibn ‘Urwa reported on the authority of Abu Saleh on the authority of Abu Hurairah that the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) said: “Leaders will take charge of you after me, where the pious (one) will lead you with his piety and the impious (one) with his impiety, so listen to them and obey them in everything which conforms with the truth. If they act rightly it is for your credit, and if they acted wrongly it is counted for you and against them.” Muslim narrated on the authority of al-A’araj, on the authority of Abu Hurairah, that the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) said: “Behold, the Imam is but a shield from behind whom the people fight and by whom they protect themselves.” Muslim reported on the authority of Abu Hazim, who said: “I accompanied Abu Hurairah for five years and heard him talking of the Prophet’s saying: The Prophets ruled over the children of Israel, whenever a Prophet died another Prophet succeeded him, but there will be no Prophet after me. There will be Khulafa’a and they will number many. They asked: What then do you order us? He said: Fulfil the bay‘ah to them one after the other and give them their due. Surely Allah will ask them about what He entrusted them with.” Ibn ‘Abbas narrated that the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) said: “If anyone sees in his amir something that displeases him let him remain patient, for behold, he who separates himself from the sultan (authority of Islam) by even so much as a hand span and dies thereupon, has died a death of the days of jahilliyah”.
In these ahadith, the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) informs us that leaders will run the affairs of Muslims, and the ahadith include the description of the Khaleefah as a shield, i.e. a protection. So the description of the Imam as a shield is informative of the benefits of the presence of the Imam, thus it is a command for action, because if the information conveyed by Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) and the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) contained rebuke then it is a command of prohibition, and if it contained praise then it is a command for action. If the ordered action is necessary to implement a hukm shara’i (divine law), or by its negligence a hukm shara’i will be neglected, then this command is decisive.
In these ahadith there is information also that those who run the affairs of Muslims are Khulafa’a, which indicates an order to appoint them. They also include a prohibition for Muslims to separate from the authority, which indicates the obligation upon Muslims to appoint an authority for themselves, i.e. ruling.
Moreover, the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) ordered the Muslims to obey the Khaleefah and to fight those who dispute his authority as Khaleefah, which indicates an order to appoint a Khaleefah and to protect his Khilafah by fighting against whosoever disputes with him. Muslim reported that the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) said: “He who pledged allegiance to an Imam giving him the clasp of his hand and the fruit of his heart shall obey him as long as he can, and if another comes to dispute with him you have to strike the neck of that man.” So the command to obey the Imam is an order to establish him, and the command to fight those who dispute with him is an evidence that this command is decisive in maintaining the presence of one Khaleefah.
I do not see any way/hope of establishing Khilafah in near or distant future.
Secondly,what way will be adopted to have Khilafah?
There are many muslim countries,will each have there own Khalifah?
Re: Re: What Is The Solution Brothers
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Iconoclast: *
It is apparent that ALL MUSLIM COUNTRIES UNITED cannot take on US. Remember just over 50 years ago britain and France was occupying most of Ismlamic countries.Today US is much stronger than that.
The ONLY SOLUTION is to work to get strong AND to establish societies in which people can make use of there abilities.
I also feel so sad for the Iraqis but i think its time for us to focus how can we PREVENT PAKISTAN BECOMING ANOTHER IRAQ.We must focus to establish a just and productive Islamic society in Pakistan to have any hope of changing the direction things have taken.OTHERWISE......
[/QUOTE]
well said.......I have brought up this issue many times at this forum encouraging my fellow brothers to put their heads down and focus on educational, political and constitutional development in their respective countries for the next 50 years or so with a special emphasis on research and development. At this crucial juncture of history, Instead of increasing the rift with the strong West it is highly advisable to use the aid and resources offered by the West to equip ourselves with modern knowledge as much as possible. Once you are strong, the world will listen to you automatically and no one will dare to FALLUJA-LIZE you anymore. In my opinion this is the permanent solution of long-term problems, which Muslims are facing today. AQ and OBL’s approach is a short-term solution to a long-term problem with a lot of side effects.
PD I agree with the long term solution that you mention. However how would you tackle the issue of masses (arab street) that become easy prey to the word of OBL? Killing OBL would be deteremental in this problem.
[QUOTE]
I do not see any way/hope of establishing Khilafah in near or distant future.Secondly,what way will be adopted to have Khilafah?There are many muslim countries,will each have there own Khalifah?
[/QUOTE]
Are Muslims all over the world allowed to have more than one
Islamic State, or more than one Khaleefah?
The system of government in Islam, which is the system of Khilafah, is a unitary system of one state and not a federal system. And Muslims all over the world are not allowed to have more than one Islamic State, nor to have more than one Khaleefah who rules them by the Book of Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) i.e. he implements the Islamic Law, because Shari’ah evidences have established this and prohibited the existence of more than one state, as is narrated by ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-’As, who said that he heard the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) say, “He who gave the bay’ah to an Imam giving him the clasp of his hand and the fruit of his heart shall obey him as long as he can, and if another person comes to dispute with him (his authority) you have to strike the neck of that person.” And as narrated by Abu Said al-Khudri, that the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) said, “If a bay’ah is taken for two Khaleefahs, kill the latter one”, and as narrated by ‘Arfajah that he heard the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) say, “If someone comes to you when you are united over one man and wants to break your strength and divide your unity, kill him.”
These ahadith are clear statements of the fact that Muslims cannot have more than one Khaleefah, and if another person tries to wrest his power it is necessary to kill that person. If bay’ah is taken for two persons, the first is considered the Khaleefah and the second is killed if he does not back out. If anyone disputed with the Khaleefah in order to break up the State or to put himself forward as Khaleefah, he should be killed.
These ahadith are also explicit that Muslims are not allowed to have more than one state and they are explicit in the necessity that the Islamic State is a state of unity, and not a state of union, made up of many units
*What Does the Structure of the Islamic State Consist Of *
The structure of the Islamic State consists of the following components:
- The Khaleefah.
- Delegated Assistants.
- The Executive Assistants.
- The Amir of Jihad (army).
- The Walis (Governors).
- The Judiciary.
- The Administrative System.
- The Council of the Ummah.
These components have been taken from the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam), because he (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) built the structure of the State, and he (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) was the head of the State, and he (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) ordered the Muslims to put for themselves a Khaleefah (after him) and he (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) appointed Abu Bakr and ‘Umar as his assistants (as narrated in Tirmidhi), “My two wazirs from the people of the earth are Abu Bakr and ‘Umar.”
And wazir means the one who helps, and not the term Minister as used in the Western democracies. Similarly, the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) appointed commanders for war and jihad and appointed walis for the provinces. He appointed Mu’adh as a governor of Yemen and appointed A’ttab ibn Usayd as governor of Makkah after the conquest of Makkah. Similarly, he (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) appointed judges to judge between people. He appointed ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib as a judge for Yemen and sent Rashid ibn ‘Abdullah as the amir of judiciary and Unjust Acts. As regards to the administration structure, he (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) appointed secretaries for the public administrations, their rank being that of head of department. He appointed Mueqeeb ibn Abu Fatimah as secretary for the spoils of war and Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman as secretary for collection of the zakat on the fruits of Hijaz.
As regards the Council of the Ummah, the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) did not always have a formal assembly, but he (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) used to take advice from Muslims. He (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) collected them on the day of Uhud and sought their advice. And sometimes he (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) used to call specific persons on a continuous basis to seek their advice, and these were some of the leaders of their people (tribes), who included Hamzah, Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, Ja’far, ‘Ali, Ibn Mas’ud, Salman, ‘Ammar, Hudhayfah, Abu Dharr, al-Miqdad, Sa’d ibn ‘Ubadah and Sa’d ibn Mu’adh, and they were like an assembly whose advice was sought.
Similarly, the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) formed an army and he was its real commander and he (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) also used to appoint commanders in some of his battles.
Re: Re: Re: What Is The Solution Brothers
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *
well said.......I have brought up this issue many times at this forum encouraging my fellow brothers to put their heads down and focus on educational, political and constitutional development in their respective countries for the next 50 years or so with a special emphasis on research and development. At this crucial juncture of history, Instead of increasing the rift with the strong West it is highly advisable to use the aid and resources offered by the West to equip ourselves with modern knowledge as much as possible. Once you are strong, the world will listen to you automatically and no one will dare to FALLUJA-LIZE you anymore. In my opinion this is the permanent solution of long-term problems, which Muslims are facing today. AQ and OBL’s approach is a short-term solution to a long-term problem with a lot of side effects.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed!
Most important of these is to have a just and stable political system and LAW and ORDER.
Only this can ensure an environment which can nurture the abilities of people and make them work hard.We do have brilliant people who can deliver BUT most either leave the country or become useless in a rotten system.How can we expect people to be productive and creative when the state does not even provide its citizens security of life let alone economic/job security.
OK heres a solution lets all meet at PD's frat house in Arizona. I'll bring the Keg (o'beer) and we'll discuss the solution.
Here is the thing liveshoaib: If all problems were resolved then the problem solvers will be out of a job so why solve problems using 6 sigma methodolgy and hit yourself in the foot.
With defined nationalistic boundries it is impractical to have a caliphate with Wazirs and other stuff that you mention. How do you plan to resolve the Kashmiri issue with Indian Muslims and Pk Muslims all part of the Ummah? Why should a Pk muslim really worry about Palestanian cause, It not in Pakistans national interest. So the point livesohaib is that theoratically it is possible to dream a Khalifah and muslim ummah but practically speaking nationalism is quite established and no government is going to give up its control to a boundryless UMMAH thingy. The Saudi King and 1 Million Princes ain't giving up their control, neither is Jordan, Kuwait or other muslim countries regardless of whether they are monarchies, dictatorships or democratically chosen govts. These govt's will not allow some stateless UMMAH thingy to take their respective power, that leads us to OBL and his cause (he wants caliphate type rule). The only way he can achieve this is to get support from uneducated masses to turn against their govt's (that my friend is anarchy / revolution), Can it happen it happened in Iran wiht Khommeni. Nothing is impossible but I think that UMMAH concept is even more detremenatal to muslims. I think it is time to embrace globalization and make progress, develop ourselves...... I think PD covered that previously.